A recent issue of the Boston Post contains a letter from a graduate who takes a different view of the foot-ball question from that held by Mr. Codman. The letter admits that the meeting of last week was premature and possibly unjust to Princeton, but denies that it was due to the sting of defeat. After pointing out that unfriendly feeling between Harvard and Princeton did not begin with the foot-ball game the letter describes Harvard's position in the following words:

"Whatever may have been the sins of ourselves or others in the past, this year our hands are clean and our hearts are pure. Princeton has broken every law of the foot-ball association to which no penalty is attached. We have not this year stooped to her methods, and we sincerely hope that in the future we never shall. Yet it is useless to attempt to cope with her or any other college that uses such means. We prefer not to play foot-ball at all, if we cannot play on equal terms, without jockeying, and without question as to the fairness of our opponents. We therefore withdraw from the association. The future course is left to the discretion of a graduate committee.

There are, I think, but two just criticisms of their position. It may be said that the charges against Princeton are not proved. The answer is that where there is so much smoke there must be some fire. Moreover, Harvard's position does not rest on the truth of the charges; Harvard simply washes her hand of those whose honesty is even questioned. The second criticism is that it would have been much better to have waited until the Princeton match and victory were old and the undergraduates' blood had had a chance to cool. I have already said that such a course seems much the wiser. Although there may be unfairness to Princeton still the instinct of self-preservation is paramount. Now, after all, is Princeton entitled to so very much consideration? It is, of course, most unfortunate, that Harvard's record in the past is not free from spots. Every Harvard man, however, believes that it is purer than that of any other college. And now that Harvard is striving for absolute purity, it is certainly no argument that she has not lived up to the standard which she has now set herself. Everyone who enjoys college sport and believes in honesty, ought, I think, to rejoice at the good which Harvard's action must eventually produce if she is steadfastly true to her present ideal.- however much he may depreciate the untimely action.